Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suraj Sopan Muthe

DRT24 Dec 2025OA/233/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's recovery application against defaulting borrowers. The court awarded the principal amount along with future interest at 9% per annum and directed enforcement of the security charge over mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Award of Rs. 39,87,917/- plus future interest at 9% p.a.; permission to sell mortgaged property; direction to issue Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Suraj Sopan Muthe — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 15.03.2025 Registered on: 17.04.2025 Decided on: 24.12.2025 Duration: Y M D 00 09 09

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 233/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 39,87,917/-

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra ,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition of Undertaking) Act 5 of 1970, carrying on banking business and having its Head Office at “Lokmangal”, 1501, Shivaji Naagar, Pune-411 005 and Branch Office at old Malwadgaon branch is now merged into Taklibhan branch, Taluka Shrirampur, District Ahmednagar-413739. Through its Authorized officer, Shri. Bhaskar Shriniwas Rachcha, Age: Major, Occ.: Service, Working as Manager, Malwadgaon, Taluka- Shrirampur, District … Applicant – Ahmednagar-413739.

Versus

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1. Suraj Sopan Muthe, Age: Major, Occupation: Business, R/o.: At Post Muthewadgaon, Taluka Shrirampur, District Ahmednagar 413739.

¶11

2. Sopan Kundlik Muthe,

¶12

Age: Major, Occupation: Business, R/o.: At Post Muthewadgaon, Taluka Shrirampur, District Ahmednagar 413739.

¶13

…Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

Mr. Atul A. Mishra -Advocate Ex-parte

¶16

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Delivered on 24.12.2025

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 39,87,917/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs, Eighty Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred and Seventeen only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 15.03.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank to sanction term loan facility and cash credit facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term loan facility of Rs. 31,35,000/- & cash credit facility of Rs. 13,50,000/- vide, sanction letter dated 30.11.2021 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facilities has @ 10.05% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶25

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, demand promissory notes, mortgage deed bearing daybook No. 5054/2021 dated 15.12.2021 and deeds of hypothecation etc. Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor for defendant no. 1 and

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

executed deed of guarantee on 17.12.2021 in favour of the

¶30

Applicant Bank.

¶31

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed registered mortgage deed bearing daybook No. 5054/2021 dated 15.12.2021 in respect of following properties:

¶32

All that piece and parcel of property at Gat No. 189/2/2/1, admeasuring area 0 H 14.67 Rat post Muthewadggaon, Tal. Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under

¶33

North: Gat No. 189/2 next drainage East: Gut No. 189/2 West: Gut No. 189/1 South: Gut No. Haregaon-Muthewadgaon Road.

¶34

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed rate of interest as per terms and conditions of the sanction letter. Thereafter, the applicant bank repeatedly made demand of loan amount and called upon the defendants to pay with the agreed

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

rate of interest thereon, but the defendants failed and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 29.05.2023. Therefore on 05.08.2024 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶39

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 15.09.2025.

¶40

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Bhaskar Shriniwas Rachcha, Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. AW-1(1) to AW-1(18) along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant Bank.

¶45

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

¶46

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable property of the borrower which is mortgaged in favour of the applicant bank.

¶47

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12% p.a. from the date of filing i.e. 15.03.2025 of this application till realization of the claim amount. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @ 9% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 233/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶53

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of 39,87,917/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs, Eighty Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred and Seventeen only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 15.03.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶54

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties vide registered mortgage deed bearing daybook No. 5054/2021 dated 15.12.2021 at Exh. AW-1(15) in the list of documents Exh. 5

¶55

All that piece and parcel of property at Gat No. 189/2/2/1, admeasuring area 0 H 14.67 R at post Muthewadggaon, Tal. Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under:-

(OA No.233/2025)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

North: Gat No. 189/2 next drainage East: Gut No. 189/2 West: Gut No. 189/1 South: Gut No. Haregaon-Muthewadgaon Road.

¶60

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods

¶61

etc., to recover its dues.

¶62

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶63

(F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶64

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.24.12.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶67

(OA No.233/2025)

¶68

Page 8 of 8

¶69

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suraj Sopan Muthe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suraj Sopan Muthe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of Maharashtra versus Babasaheb Arun Garud

Bank of India versus Sandip Asaram Varne

Canara Bank versus Akash Balasaheb Sonawane

Bank of India versus Ganesh Gopichand Jadhav

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Varsha Atul Ingale

Bank of Maharashtra versus Tarachand Rakhmaji Argade (Deceased)